BlogNomic has moved!

The game is now running at blognomic.com

Monday, August 25, 2003

Proposal: Patching a loophole

While discussing the rules regarding enacting proposals with Mat, it came to our attention that although the rules allow for Citizens to change their votes while a proposal is still pending, the Ruleset doesn't allow all Pending Proposals equal time to be considered. This is because Pending Proposals don't necessarily have to be marked as FAILED in the order they were proposed, yet they must be ENACTED according to that order (ie- the proposal queue).

Why is this a problem? Its a problem because it means Pending Proposals with a lot of FOR or IMP votes early on will sit there and can be continuously debated until the queue gets to them, while those with a couple AGAINST votes early on can be FAILED almost immediately with less than the number of quorum voting against them and with hardly any time for discussion. This presents a condition where Proposals are more likely to fail, regardless of merit.

The loophole is in Rule #5 and is basically because the third paragraph doesn't mention that Pending Proposals must be FAILED in a certain order, which is the opposite of what the second paragraph says regarding ENACTMENT.

I propose we add the following to Rule #5 to clarify the order:

All Pending Proposals must be either ENACTED or FAILED in the order they were proposed (unless they make no changes to the Ruleset).

Please note that if you think there's a way to speed up the mechanics of the queue process (as some have suggested may be needed due to an increase in players), passing this clarification is the first step to moving things along, by processing them in the proper order.

Failed by Mat, Wednesday the 27th